Hi Andy,
You are asking to explicitly define terms like project, company, product. These
are rarely possible to define outside of the generic use of the term and each
individual contract. I assume you understand that it is not possible to take
any stand of those in an email. We have these listed in the FAQ and contracts
in as clear way as we have been able to list these.
I have also tried to explain these, but your tone feels rather aggressive. I do
not understand what makes you say: “Even a solo developer needs to hire a
lawyer before touching anything Qt-related.” For most of the situation the
licensing of Qt is really simple and also very permissive. Yes, there are
certain complex corner cases, like mixing of commercial on open-source versions
of the Qt framework/tools. But how often do you need to mix these? Most of the
Qt users are using either the commercial or the open-source version.
Yours,
Tuukka
From: Andy <asmalo...@gmail.com>
Date: Tuesday 31. March 2020 at 16.47
To: Tuukka Turunen <tuukka.turu...@qt.io>
Cc: Giuseppe D'Angelo <giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com>, "interest@qt-project.org"
<interest@qt-project.org>
Subject: Re: [Interest] Qt Creator licensing for companies with Qt Commercial
developers
> "This is at the moment not listed as an allowed case..."
And this again is here the Qt company is digging it's own grave.
What constitutes a "product"? If a company has one team working on an open
source library and another team using it in a proprietary application - what
then? What if an internal tool uses some code or a library from proprietary
application? What if...
Even a solo developer needs to hire a lawyer before touching anything
Qt-related.
Once you start trying to codify all the different scenarios in your licensing,
it becomes toxic and people will avoid it
---
Andy Maloney // https://asmaloney.com
twitter ~ @asmaloney<https://twitter.com/asmaloney>
On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 9:36 AM Tuukka Turunen
<tuukka.turu...@qt.io<mailto:tuukka.turu...@qt.io>> wrote:
Hi,
The point of the "Prohibited combination" is to prevent a company or a chain of
companies (like in a typical subcontracting scenario) from making part of the
product with non-paid Qt and part with paid. Qt being as defined in the
commercial license agreement, i.e. including tools and framework. This was what
the person initiating this mail thread asked about. I do agree that it gets
complex when one starts including items created by an independent third party.
This is at the moment not listed as an allowed case, even though it is not
something we specifically aimed to prevent.
Yours,
Tuukka
On 31.3.2020, 15.03, "Interest on behalf of Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest"
<interest-boun...@qt-project.org<mailto:interest-boun...@qt-project.org> on
behalf of interest@qt-project.org<mailto:interest@qt-project.org>> wrote:
On 3/31/20 1:22 PM, Tuukka Turunen wrote:
> For completely independent projects/products this is fine. Note that
these really should not be same or in practice the same - or in any way
depending, relating, using etc each other as defined in the license agreement.
>
> See licensing FAQ question 2.7
athttps://www.qt.io/faq/<http://www.qt.io/faq/> and License agreement
athttps://www.qt.io/terms-conditions/<http://www.qt.io/terms-conditions/>
It is still unclear if the usage of Qt _Creator_ for developing some
code would cause such code to fall under the restrictions of commercial
licensing.
Here's a few scenarios:
1) I have a Qt commercial license. In my project using commercial Qt I
want to use a library developed by
1a) some other team in my company;
1b) someone else.
This other library is under a liberal license; does NOT use Qt itself in
any way; but has been developed using Qt Creator (GPL). Can I use it in
my product under the commercial license? Or would it fall under the
"Prohibited Combination":
> “Prohibited Combination” shall mean any means to (i) use, combine,
incorporate, link or integrate Licensed Software with any software created with
or incorporating Open Source Qt, (ii) use Licensed Software for creation of any
software created with or incorporating Open Source Qt
Does "created with" here extend to GPL Creator?
2) Same as 1, but this time with the library using Qt (as in: using
headers, linking against it). Example: a Qt-based library coming from
KDE Frameworks, developed using Creator.
Thanks,
--
Giuseppe D'Angelo |
giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com<mailto:giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com> | Senior Software
Engineer
KDAB (France) S.A.S., a KDAB Group company
Tel. France +33 (0)4 90 84 08 53, http://www.kdab.com
KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts
_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org<mailto:Interest@qt-project.org>
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
